Category Archives: 8(a) Program

Posts dealing with the 8(a) business development program, including 8(a) admissions and eligiblity, requests for reconsideration, ongoing eligibility and compliance, and related matters.

8(a) Fraud: Proposal Claimed Past Performance Of Fake NASA Contract

Posted on by

A proposal submitted on behalf of an 8(a) company claimed that the company had performed a $3 million NASA contract even though no such contract existed, according to a recent report issued by the SBA Office of Inspector General.  As alleged in the SBA OIG report, the same honesty-challenged 8(a) company claimed to have 33 employees, even though it never had more than two.

Perhaps it is little wonder that the company in question is alleged to have passed through nearly 100% of its work on several 8(a) set-asides to its non-8(a) subcontractor.

Continue reading →

SBA 8(a) Termination Appeals: The Importance of Technicalities

Posted on by

When it comes to SBA 8(a) termination appeals, failing to follow technical filing requirements can be fatal, as one contractor recently learned the hard way.

In James Kelly Construction Co., SBA No. BDPT-459 (2012), the SBA terminated James Kelly Construction Company from the 8(a) program, alleging that the company’s owner owed outstanding taxes.  The company filed a SBA 8(a) termination appeal with the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals, arguing that the owner did not, in fact, owe taxes.

Unfortunately, the company–which prepared and filed its appeal without a lawyer–failed to include with its appeal a copy of the SBA’s termination determination and the date the determination was received.  Because both of these items are required by regulation, SBA OHA dismissed the company’s SBA 8(a) termination appeal, and subsequently denied the company’s request that SBA OHA reconsider its dismissal.

SBA OHA appeals, including 8(a) termination appeals, come with a variety of technical requirements.  As the James Kelly Construction Co. case demonstrates, meeting those technical requirements is imperative, or the appeal could be lost before SBA OHA ever reaches the merits of the matter.

No SBA Prior Approval of Teaming Agreement Leads to 8(a) Program Termination

Posted on by

In a case that ought to make 8(a) participants sit up and take notice, an 8(a) company was terminated from the 8(a) program for failing to obtain the SBA’s prior approval of its teaming agreement for an 8(a) contract–and the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals upheld the termination.

Continue reading →

SBA OIG Issues Report Questioning 8(a) Non-Manufacturer Rule Waiver

Posted on by

The SBA’s waiver of the non-manufacturer rule in connection with an 8(a) sole source contract resulted in a “pass through” award to a large business, according to a report by the SBA Office of Inspector General.  As a result, the 8(a) contractor in question received only $153,000 for “minimal” oversight, while the remainder of the $7.78 million 8(a) set-aside contract went to large companies.

The SBA OIG was quick to point out that the arrangement was legal, but questioned whether the pass-through provided appropriate developmental opportunities to the 8(a) contractor–as well as whether taxpayers are well-served by such large percentages of “small business” contracting dollars flowing to large companies.

Continue reading →

SBA 8(a) Mentor-Protege Joint Ventures: SBA OIG Questions Oversight

Posted on by

SBA 8(a) mentor-protege joint ventures suffer from inadequate oversight and may not adequately benefit 8(a) protege firms, says the SBA Office of Inspector General.  In a recently-released report, the SBA OIG criticized the SBA’s oversight of 8(a) mentor-protege joint ventures, finding that there is no way to ensure that 8(a) protege’s substantially benefit from the 8(a) mentor-protege joint venture program.

Some highlights from the 37-page report follow.

Continue reading →

8(a) Mentor-Protege Agreements Cannot Be Protested, Says SBA OHA

Posted on by

8(a) mentor-protege agreements cannot be protested by competitors, according to a recently-issued decision by the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals.  In Size Appeal of Professional Performance Development Group, Inc., SBA No. SIZ-5398 (2012), SBA OHA held that the SBA’s decision to approve an 8(a) mentor-protege agreement is outside the scope of the SBA size protest process.

Continue reading →

SBA OHA: Tribal Companies Entitled to Broad Affiliation Exceptions

Posted on by

Indian tribes, their holding companies, and companies owned by those holding companies are entitled to broad exceptions from the ordinary SBA affiliation rules, according to a recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals size appeal decision.

SBA OHA’s decision in Size Appeal of Roundhouse PBN, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-5383 (2012), holds that the SBA cannot use non-applicable affiliation rules to circumvent the regulatory exception from affiliation between tribal companies.  In its ruling, SBA OHA also sidestepped an interesting tribal size question: did Congress truly intend for some tribal companies to be “small” for 8(a) program purposes, but “other than small” for all other government contracts?

As you can probably tell, the Roundhouse PBN case is not your run-of-the-mill SBA OHA size appeal decision, meaning a slightly longer-than-normal blog post is in order.  Let’s dive right in.

Continue reading →